Question about Bianchi 9R shoulder holsters

This is a discussion on Question about Bianchi 9R shoulder holsters within the Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Hi,
I have a question about the Bianchi 9R shoulder holsters.
Does anyone here know the difference between the Bianchi 9R-1 and the 9R-2? I ...

Question about Bianchi 9R shoulder holsters

Does anyone here know the difference between the Bianchi 9R-1 and the 9R-2? I also saw somewhere that Bianchi made a 9R-3.

Anyway, somewhere on the Internet I read the 9R-1 is for J-frame revolvers and the 9R-2 is for K-frame revolvers.

Then I read that both of these holsters are the same size and will fit either J or K-frames and that the only difference is that the 9R-2 has belt loops so it can be carried 2 ways, (shoulder and belt), so Bianchi called it the 9R-2.

The reason I'm asking is I have a S&W Mod. 649 J-frame with a 2 1/8" barrel and I want a 9R for it but if they are for different size frames or different size barrels, I want to get the right one.

Which 9R will best fit the S&W Mod. 649 J-frame with a 2 1/8" barrel?

Oh yeah, do they retain the revolvers by use of a spring or elastic? Once again, I've read both and I figure it's one or the other but may be both.

From the designer

Bianchi's original 'upside down' shoulder holster is from the 60s and the revolver was held in place by an elastic closure over the split, as did Safariland's of the period. It was an effort to reproduce the performance of the Berns Martin "Lighting" upside down holster without using an expensive spring. Its replacement was the 9R, which did have a spring, but which spring was greatly simplified over the Berns Martin spring (which was inserted into the mouth of the holster, rather than the muzzle as with the 9R, which itself was an extension of what was learned with the Bianchi M27). The screw post is NOT a tension adjustment; it is there for the same reason as the Berns Martin stitched in welt: as a leverage point for the muzzle, and secondarily provides resistance to the pistol being 'snapped out' during a jump. The third version was intended to add coverage for the sharp hammer spur of Smith and Wessons, and the rear sight of the M19, and to provide ambidextrous carry on the belt. I was chief designer for Bianchi 1970-1990 and built the prototypes for the versions 1 and 2 of the 9R (not the 9). Richard Nichols, Australia

The Alessi rig is well-executed, with the heavy influence of Seventrees' designs and construction in evidence. No production maker would dare have the design in its lineup unless they were paid up on their liability insurance for many years to come; thumbreaks on an upside down rig rely too much on the user, not the design. Speaking from hard-won experience in the courtroom.

"Legal" design

Ever been sued? When a firearm is involved, and the target is big enough (read, "insurance"), injuries are inevitable so lawsuits are inevitable (often brought by the widow), and the process is expensive. Let's assume no one on this forum has products liability insurance, but even with it, lawsuits are an unpleasant and expensive process even when you "win". In the case of this holster, it's about "foreseeability": if you can foresee the user forgetting to snap his holster, or failing to snap it up completely, or the 20 cents worth of fastener failing (you and I know they do), you can be (and holster companies have been) held liable. So you see, it's not necessarily about being held liable; it's about the great expense of defense. And if you are insured, you might become uninsurable with a suit or two. Long story short: don't invite lawsuits with a design; instead design to avoid them.

Bianchi's original 'upside down' shoulder holster is from the 60s and the revolver was held in place by an elastic closure over the split, as did Safariland's of the period. It was an effort to reproduce the performance of the Berns Martin "Lighting" upside down holster without using an expensive spring. Its replacement was the 9R, which did have a spring, but which spring was greatly simplified over the Berns Martin spring (which was inserted into the mouth of the holster, rather than the muzzle as with the 9R, which itself was an extension of what was learned with the Bianchi M27). The screw post is NOT a tension adjustment; it is there for the same reason as the Berns Martin stitched in welt: as a leverage point for the muzzle, and secondarily provides resistance to the pistol being 'snapped out' during a jump. The third version was intended to add coverage for the sharp hammer spur of Smith and Wessons, and the rear sight of the M19, and to provide ambidextrous carry on the belt. I was chief designer for Bianchi 1970-1990 and built the prototypes for the versions 1 and 2 of the 9R (not the 9). Richard Nichols, Australia

Thank you for the information from "the horse's mouth". I have several 9R holsters and really like them, but it is good to know more about their history.